this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
523 points (97.5% liked)
Greentext
6759 readers
853 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why say "deleting yourself"? Are we really going to censor our speech here too? There's no advertisers to spook by saying killing or committing suicide
That's how I speak and write.
You do you.
I know, as I've hosted my own Lemmy instance on several occasions. There are a lot of social and networking issues an admin has to consider depending on the content and tone they're willing to accept on their instance but that's besides the point.
The point is that I moderate my speech or of consideration to my fellow human beings and not advertising companies.
"consideration to my fellow human beings".
Because your fellow human beings are so profoundly stupid as to not understand that "delete" and "kill" have the same semantic value in that sentence?
If you are going to argue for word replacement it should be for stylistic reasons (rhyming, alliteration, humour, etc), or semantic reasons, as in actually changing the meaning of the statement.
Changing the wording of statement, while retaining the same semantic value, does nothing to reduce offense when the semantic value is what would cause offense.
No, because people could be traumatized by suicide and get a reaction every time they hear the word. I compare your argument to refusing to stop blasting off crackers around war veterans, it's obviously not gunshots and vets are not stupid enough to mistake them for gunshots.
No, I argue just the way I like.
I'm not trying to reduce offense, I'm trying to be considerate. But it seems that's an unknown concept to you. I see no point in communicating with you further, good bye and I wish you a life as nice as you are.
Fair enough, I can't argue with that. Language shifts and evolves I suppose, but it still seems problematic to me that the people (not you specifically) change the way they speak to suit an algorithm and not the other way around.
And that's not even mentioning the fact that many people are perfectly alright with using "unalive" and "delete" instead of "kill" or "die" but can't bring themselves to use trans inclusive language, for example. Again, not refering to you with this, you were just the unfortunate person to receive my albeit unwanted rant.
Well I actively hacked at the X-Twitter shadowban algo to prove censorship to the point where my account was not only shadowbanned but shadowblocked. Can't even log in to delete my account anymore. But I suppose that's the opposite of what you're describing.
There's an important difference, censorship forces people to adhere to synthetic rules. It's harder to force people to be inclusive or nice.